提高标准:评估肺类癌手术治疗临床指南的质量和一致性。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Luca Bertolaccini, Claudia Bardoni, Giovanni Caffarena, Matteo Chiari, Cristina Diotti, Antonio Mazzella, Lavinia Benini, Francesca Spada, Giovanni Corso, Eleonora Pisa, Monica Casiraghi, Nicola Fazio, Lorenzo Spaggiari
{"title":"提高标准:评估肺类癌手术治疗临床指南的质量和一致性。","authors":"Luca Bertolaccini, Claudia Bardoni, Giovanni Caffarena, Matteo Chiari, Cristina Diotti, Antonio Mazzella, Lavinia Benini, Francesca Spada, Giovanni Corso, Eleonora Pisa, Monica Casiraghi, Nicola Fazio, Lorenzo Spaggiari","doi":"10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000949","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Leading societies have established guidelines that vary significantly regarding recommendations for the surgical management of pulmonary carcinoids (PC). We aimed to assess current guidelines and recommendations for PC surgical management, benchmark their methodological quality, and identify factors that may influence their effectiveness in guiding surgical practice. Literature was sought to identify relevant guidelines for the management of PC. Each guideline was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool and rated on a seven-point scale for items and domains. Five observers assessed four guidelines (developed by ENETS in 2015, ESMO in 2021, NANETS in 2021, and NCCN in 2020). In Scope and Purpose and Stakeholder Involvement, the NCCN guideline achieved the highest score. In Rigor of Development, NANETS and ENETS achieved the highest score. In Clarity of Presentation, ENETS guidelines scored the highest score. For applicability, NCCN received the highest score. All guidelines got the highest score in the Rigor of Development and Clarity of Presentation domains, whereas the Applicability domain received the lowest score. The methodological quality of guidelines on the surgical management of PC varies significantly. The findings underscore the need for future guidelines to prioritize practical implementation in clinical and surgical practice, ensuring that recommendations reflect best practices and effectively meet surgeons' needs. Based on our AGREE II appraisal, the ENETS and ESMO guidelines might be recommended as a model for developing future recommendations and guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":11830,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Cancer Prevention","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Raising the bar: evaluating quality and consistency in clinical guidelines for surgical management of pulmonary carcinoid.\",\"authors\":\"Luca Bertolaccini, Claudia Bardoni, Giovanni Caffarena, Matteo Chiari, Cristina Diotti, Antonio Mazzella, Lavinia Benini, Francesca Spada, Giovanni Corso, Eleonora Pisa, Monica Casiraghi, Nicola Fazio, Lorenzo Spaggiari\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000949\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Leading societies have established guidelines that vary significantly regarding recommendations for the surgical management of pulmonary carcinoids (PC). We aimed to assess current guidelines and recommendations for PC surgical management, benchmark their methodological quality, and identify factors that may influence their effectiveness in guiding surgical practice. Literature was sought to identify relevant guidelines for the management of PC. Each guideline was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool and rated on a seven-point scale for items and domains. Five observers assessed four guidelines (developed by ENETS in 2015, ESMO in 2021, NANETS in 2021, and NCCN in 2020). In Scope and Purpose and Stakeholder Involvement, the NCCN guideline achieved the highest score. In Rigor of Development, NANETS and ENETS achieved the highest score. In Clarity of Presentation, ENETS guidelines scored the highest score. For applicability, NCCN received the highest score. All guidelines got the highest score in the Rigor of Development and Clarity of Presentation domains, whereas the Applicability domain received the lowest score. The methodological quality of guidelines on the surgical management of PC varies significantly. The findings underscore the need for future guidelines to prioritize practical implementation in clinical and surgical practice, ensuring that recommendations reflect best practices and effectively meet surgeons' needs. Based on our AGREE II appraisal, the ENETS and ESMO guidelines might be recommended as a model for developing future recommendations and guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11830,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Cancer Prevention\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Cancer Prevention\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000949\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Cancer Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000949","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

主要学会已经建立了指导方针,在肺类癌(PC)的外科治疗建议方面差异很大。我们的目的是评估当前的前列腺癌手术管理指南和建议,对其方法质量进行基准测试,并确定可能影响其指导手术实践有效性的因素。我们寻求文献来确定前列腺癌管理的相关指南。使用研究和评估指南评估(AGREE II)工具对每个指南进行评估,并对项目和领域进行7分制评分。五名观察员评估了四项指南(由ENETS于2015年制定,ESMO于2021年制定,NANETS于2021年制定,NCCN于2020年制定)。在范围和目的以及利益相关者参与方面,NCCN指南获得了最高分。在“发展的严谨性”中,NANETS和ENETS获得了最高分。在表述的清晰度方面,ENETS指南得分最高。在适用性方面,NCCN获得了最高分。所有的指导方针在开发的严密性和表示的清晰性领域得到了最高分,而适用性领域得到了最低值。前列腺癌手术治疗指南的方法学质量差异很大。研究结果强调了未来指南在临床和外科实践中优先考虑实际实施的必要性,确保建议反映最佳实践并有效满足外科医生的需求。基于我们的AGREE II评估,可以推荐ENETS和ESMO指南作为制定未来建议和指南的模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Raising the bar: evaluating quality and consistency in clinical guidelines for surgical management of pulmonary carcinoid.

Leading societies have established guidelines that vary significantly regarding recommendations for the surgical management of pulmonary carcinoids (PC). We aimed to assess current guidelines and recommendations for PC surgical management, benchmark their methodological quality, and identify factors that may influence their effectiveness in guiding surgical practice. Literature was sought to identify relevant guidelines for the management of PC. Each guideline was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool and rated on a seven-point scale for items and domains. Five observers assessed four guidelines (developed by ENETS in 2015, ESMO in 2021, NANETS in 2021, and NCCN in 2020). In Scope and Purpose and Stakeholder Involvement, the NCCN guideline achieved the highest score. In Rigor of Development, NANETS and ENETS achieved the highest score. In Clarity of Presentation, ENETS guidelines scored the highest score. For applicability, NCCN received the highest score. All guidelines got the highest score in the Rigor of Development and Clarity of Presentation domains, whereas the Applicability domain received the lowest score. The methodological quality of guidelines on the surgical management of PC varies significantly. The findings underscore the need for future guidelines to prioritize practical implementation in clinical and surgical practice, ensuring that recommendations reflect best practices and effectively meet surgeons' needs. Based on our AGREE II appraisal, the ENETS and ESMO guidelines might be recommended as a model for developing future recommendations and guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
96
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: European Journal of Cancer Prevention aims to promote an increased awareness of all aspects of cancer prevention and to stimulate new ideas and innovations. The Journal has a wide-ranging scope, covering such aspects as descriptive and metabolic epidemiology, histopathology, genetics, biochemistry, molecular biology, microbiology, clinical medicine, intervention trials and public education, basic laboratory studies and special group studies. Although affiliated to a European organization, the journal addresses issues of international importance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信